MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1556200652 · doi:10.1161/circ.129.suppl_1.mp49

Abstract MP49: Sugar Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages and risk of Mortality in US adults

2014· article· en· W1556200652 on OpenAlexaff
Vasanti Malik, An Pan, Lawrence de Koning, Eva Schernhammer, Walter C. Willett, Frank B. Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioCalorieProportional hazards modelDiabetes mellitusEnvironmental healthConfidence intervalObesityLower riskType 2 diabetesInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs) are the single largest source of calories and added sugars in the US diet and regular consumption has been associated with weight gain and risk of chronic diseases. Artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) are often suggested as alternatives to SSB but little is known about their long-term health effects. Whether consumption of SSBs or ASBs is associated with risk of mortality is unknown. Methods: We prospectively followed 38,602 men from the Health Professional’s Follow-up study (1986-2010) and 82,592 women from the Nurses’ Health study (1980-2010) who were free from cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer at baseline. Diet was assessed using validated food frequency questionnaires every 4 years and Cox Proportional Hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results: We documented 27,691 deaths (6,631 CVD and 10,447 cancer deaths) during 3.14 million person-years. After adjusting for major dietary and lifestyle risk factors, and BMI, baseline diabetes, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia, consumption of SSBs was associated with an increased risk of total mortality, which was mainly driven by CVD mortality among individuals consuming at least 2 servings per day; pooled HRs (95% CIs) across categories (<1/month, 1-4/month, 2-6/week, 1-<2/day and ≥2/day) were 1.00, 0.95 (0.91, 0.98), 0.96 (0.93, 0.99), 1.02 (0.96, 1.08), and 1.18 (1.04, 1.33), respectively (P-trend= 0.0001) for total mortality, and 1.00, 0.97 (0.90, 1.02), 0.96 (0.90, 1.02), 1.04 (0.93, 1.16) and 1.28 (1.09, 1.51), respectively (P-trend=0.007) for CVD mortality. In contrast, ASBs were not associated with mortality; pooled HR’s (95% CIs) across categories (<1/month, 1-4/month, 2-6/week, 1-<2/day and ≥2/day) were 1.00, 0.92 (0.89, 0.95), 0.91 (0.86, 0.97), 0.91 (0.86, 0.95) and 0.99 (0.85, 1.15), respectively (P-trend=0.50) for total mortality and 1.00, 0.86 (0.80, 0.92), 0.87 (0.81, 0.94), 0.96 (0.88, 1.06) and 0.96 (0.74, 1.25), respectively (P-trend=0.99) for CVD mortality. No associations were observed with cancer mortality for either SSBs or ASBs in multi-variable adjusted models. Conclusion: Regular consumption of SSBs is associated with an increased risk of total and CVD mortality, providing additional support for recommendations and policies to limit intake of these beverages.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→